TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 1117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore, sustained the addition by estimating 10% of alleged bogus proceedings considering the Gross Profit Ratio of 3.98% shown by the assessee for the year under consideration. In view of above concurrent findings of the fact arrived at by the CIT(Appeals) and the Tribunal, we do not find any error with the impugned order giving rise to any question of law much-less substantial question of law for consideration. - R/TAX APPEAL NO. 280 OF 2022 - - - Dated:- 5-7-2022 - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA AND HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA M R BHATT CO. FOR THE APPELLANT ORDER PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA The present appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is directed again ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income Tax Act, 1961 (For short the Act ) on 17.01.2014. The assessee filed his reply on 7.02.2014 contending inter- alia that the findings of the sales tax authorities are not conclusive and cannot establish that purchases made are bogus. The Assessing Officer on the basis of available material on record made addition of Rs.6,45,676/- under section 68 of the Act for the bogus purchases made by the assessee on the basis of the information received from Maharashtra VAT department and passed the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Act. 3.2 The assessee being aggrieved preferred appeal before CIT(Appeals) and submitted that the purchases made by the assessee were genuine and to substantiate his claim the appellant produced copies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocumentary evidence to establish the genuineness of purchase made from the parties, but the factum of the said billings parties being engaged in the bogus bills was not ruled out. Accordingly, after examining all the facts and circumstances and also relying upon decision on the ITAT, Mumbai Benches cited (supra) on similar issue, he restricted the impugned addition and estimated the same at 10% of alleged bogus purchases i.e. Rs.14,91,767/-. We do not find any infirmity in the approach of the ld.CIT(A) in restricting the impugned additions, and therefore, his order does not warrant our intervention in this score. We confirm the order of the 1ld.CIT(A) and dismiss this ground of appeal of the Revenue. 4. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Manis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the alleged bogus purchases i.e. 10% of Rs.6,45,676/- in the total facts and circumstances which emerged before it by way of material on record. 5.2 In the decision in the case of N. K. Industries Limited (Supra) sought to be relied upon would hardly come to the rescue of the appellant department since therein the material was available during the course of search which exposed the falsity of entries made in the regular books of account. The unexplained expenditure that is bogus purchases were on the basis of the fictitious invoices debited in the trading account. The Tribunal made 25% of the total purchase on the ground that the purchase was from bogus suppliers. It was held by the High Court that the Tribunal should have made addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
